IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlage/v71y2025i3id291-2024-agricecon.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From 'separation' to 'reconstruction': An analytical framework and empirical test for the adjustment of the relationship between agriculture and animal husbandry of farm households

Author

Listed:
  • He Xu

    (College of Economics and Management, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, P.R. China)

  • Shuai Liu

    (College of Economics and Management, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, P.R. China
    Center for Rural Economy in Main Grain Producing Areas, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, P.R. China)

  • Qinghai Guo

    (College of Economics and Management, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, P.R. China
    Center for Rural Economy in Main Grain Producing Areas, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, P.R. China)

Abstract

The negative benefits derived from the long-term separation of agriculture and animal husbandry in China have hindered the sustainable development of agriculture and the transformation of agricultural modernisation. The relationship between agriculture and animal husbandry is reconstructed from separation to reintegration. Focusing on the micro-agricultural production level, it relies on farmers to moderately adjust the existing family management structure and choose the family management mode combining planting and breeding. Structural and synergistic contradictions exist between agricultural economic development and ecological protection in the main corn-producing areas. Therefore, based on the micro-survey data of Jilin Province, China, the paper analyses the factors and mechanisms that influence farmers' choice of the combined management mode of planting and breeding. The results showed that the scale of land management, the stability of cultivated land management rights, the policy insurance of animal husbandry, the average profit of beef cattle head, and the cognition of income growth of animal husbandry were positively correlated with farmers' choice of the combined management mode. The spatial distance between farming and animal husbandry was negatively correlated with farmers' choice of management mode. There are mediating effects of animal husbandry breeding technology in farmers' choice of combined management mode, and there is regional heterogeneity in farmers' choice of combined management mode. Therefore, the reconstruction of the relationship between agriculture and animal husbandry should rely on large-scale farmers, optimise the planting structure of the main corn-producing areas, take multiple measures to stabilise the management right of cultivated land, and further improve the policy insurance and breeding technical support system of animal husbandry. This study can provide a theoretical framework and practical reference for reconstructing the relationship between agriculture and animal husbandry in China and other developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • He Xu & Shuai Liu & Qinghai Guo, 2025. "From 'separation' to 'reconstruction': An analytical framework and empirical test for the adjustment of the relationship between agriculture and animal husbandry of farm households," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 71(3), pages 142-159.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:71:y:2025:i:3:id:291-2024-agricecon
    DOI: 10.17221/291/2024-AGRICECON
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/291/2024-AGRICECON.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/291/2024-AGRICECON.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/291/2024-AGRICECON?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chloe MacLaren & Andrew Mead & Derk Balen & Lieven Claessens & Ararso Etana & Janjo Haan & Wiepie Haagsma & Ortrud Jäck & Thomas Keller & Johan Labuschagne & Åsa Myrbeck & Magdalena Necpalova & Genero, 2022. "Long-term evidence for ecological intensification as a pathway to sustainable agriculture," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 770-779, September.
    2. Shen, Zhiyang & Wang, Songkai & Boussemart, Jean-Philippe & Hao, Yu, 2022. "Digital transition and green growth in Chinese agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    3. Zhang, Yingnan & Long, Hualou & Chen, Shuocun & Ma, Li & Gan, Muye, 2023. "The development of multifunctional agriculture in farming regions of China: Convergence or divergence?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Huang, Na & Lin, Xiaomao & Lun, Fei & Zeng, Ruiyun & Sassenrath, Gretchen F. & Pan, Zhihua, 2024. "Nitrogen fertilizer use and climate interactions: Implications for maize yields in Kansas," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    2. Sieglinde Snapp & Tek Bahadur Sapkota & Jordan Chamberlin & Cindy Marie Cox & Samuel Gameda & Mangi Lal Jat & Paswel Marenya & Khondoker Abdul Mottaleb & Christine Negra & Kalimuthu Senthilkumar & Tes, 2023. "Spatially differentiated nitrogen supply is key in a global food–fertilizer price crisis," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(10), pages 1268-1278, October.
    3. Ahmad, Yazdanian & Zahra, Rahmati & Ali, Cheshmehzangi, 2024. "Transformations in urban gardens: Neoliberal influences and land use conflicts in Shiraz's Qasr al-Dasht Gardens," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    4. Javed, Hasnain & Du, Jianguo & Iqbal, Shuja & Nassani, Abdelmohsen A. & Basheer, Muhammad Farhan, 2024. "The impact of mineral resource abundance on environmental degradation in ten mineral- rich countries: Do the green innovation and financial technology matter?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Shen Yuan & Shaobing Peng, 2017. "Exploring the Trends in Nitrogen Input and Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Agricultural Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    8. Katarina Arvidsson Segerkvist & Helena Hansson & Ulf Sonesson & Stefan Gunnarsson, 2021. "A Systematic Mapping of Current Literature on Sustainability at Farm-Level in Beef and Lamb Meat Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    9. Vainio, Annukka & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Hyvönen, Terho & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "The legitimacy of result-oriented and action-oriented agri-environmental schemes: A comparison of farmers’ and citizens’ perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    11. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    12. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    13. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    14. Diriba Shiferaw G., 2017. "Water-Nutrients Interaction: Exploring the Effects of Water as a Central Role for Availability & Use Efficiency of Nutrients by Shallow Rooted Vegetable Crops - A Review," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(10), pages 78-93, 10-2017.
    15. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    16. Viet Ha Trinh Thi & Wenqi Zhou, 2024. "A Systematic Analysis of the Development of Agricultural Modernization and Its Effect on Crop Production in Northeastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-12, June.
    17. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.
    18. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.
    19. Kataki, Sampriti & West, Helen & Clarke, Michèle & Baruah, D.C., 2016. "Phosphorus recovery as struvite: Recent concerns for use of seed, alternative Mg source, nitrogen conservation and fertilizer potential," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 142-156.
    20. Yang, Changjin & Qi, Huarui & Jia, Lijun & Wang, Yanjiao & Huang, Dan, 2024. "Impact of digital technologies and financial development on green growth: Role of mineral resources, institutional quality, and human development in South Asia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:71:y:2025:i:3:id:291-2024-agricecon. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.